From Stochastic, the newest addition to Science Blogs, we learn that King Tut's penis has been re-discovered. Unfortunately the original article from Discover.com has been taken offline, but the gist of the text is preserved at Stochastic.
Does it make me a bad archaeologist that I didn't even realize that Tut's little Titan was missing? Well, I ask how many of you - especially other archaeologists - had any idea about this.
As it turns out a set of X-rays taken in the 1960s failed to show the pharaonic unit, leading to the belief that it had been taken. However a new set of CT scans show that the mummified monarch was not necro-neutered after all.
I'm no radiologist, but I would have suspected that the lack of a bacullum in H sapiens would make it difficult to identify mummified manhood with an X-ray.